Prosecutors for Obama hunting for 'lying ads'

Prosecutors for Obama hunting for 'lying ads'

www.worldnetdaily.com

A team of Obama-supporting prosecutors and sheriffs in Missouri is preparing to pursue legal challenges to any presidential campaign ads deemed to be false or misleading.

KMOV-TV in St. Louis reports District Attorney Robert McCulloch, a past president of the National District Attorneys Association, said that whether the ads could be attributed to an opponent's campaign itself, or another organization, "If they're not going to tell the truth, somebody's got to step up and say, 'That's not the truth. This is the truth.'"

The effort appeared to be part of a move by the Obama campaign to block advertisements to which it objects. The campaign also sent "threatening" letters to several news agencies in Pennsylvania and Ohio demanding they stop airing ads exposing Obama's gun stance, according to the National Rifle Association.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
campaignspot.nationalreview.com
www.breitbart.tv

Truth squads? That sounds ominous. And this seems to be a concerted effort to stifle Free Speech and the First Amendment rights of anyone who opposes Barack Obama.

It is painfully partisan. No equivalent effort to verify the truth of anti-McCain ads is undertaken by these hacks.

Is the Obama campaign so desperate that it must silence opponents?

www.worldnetdaily.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Originally posted by jsobecky

It is painfully partisan. No equivalent effort to verify the truth of anti-McCain ads is undertaken by these hacks.
(visit the link for the full news article)

There should be measures taken by both sides and eliminating sleaze should be a bipartisan effort.

Politics, the whole world over, is in the mess it's in partly because of partisan support determined to smear the 'other party' - whoever that is. Ultimately, it's us that suffer because of it. We need transparency and honesty in politics and journalism and we rarely have either. If politicians and journalists can lie to support their own 'team', they're going to be willing to do it any time it suits them and the bulk of the time that means misleading the people they're meant to serve.

ATS Threads Here:

Obama's Truth Squads

McCain's Truth Squads

Whatever happened to free speech? I'd agree that people who put out hateful or violent messages should be prosecuted. But to legally charge them for spreading lies and disinformation is a completely different thing. We are fed lies and disinformation by politicians and the media every single day. Does this mean we can legally charge them if we gather enough evidence to prove we were mislead or lied to?

[edit on 29-9-2008 by Bullhorn]

reply to post by Bullhorn


Frankly it sure as heck SHOULD. I'm so tired of the "entertainmentization" of news and the complete lack of responsibility to present the facts. I'd be thrilled to see both campaigns be forced to keep it factual and to the point.

A new low for the democrats to engage in this. And a new low for U.S. politics.

But wait! For years now, the liberals have been screaming about rights being taken away by Bush, etc. - even though no one seemed to ever be able to name a right they've lost.

Look who's really taking away your rights ...

reply to post by centurion1211


Just wait and see what happens if he is President. We'll have truth squads, we'll have the fairness doctrine, we'll be stripped of our second amendment rights. The list goes on and on.

Exciting stuff isn't it?

reply to post by nyk537


Whoa dude. Fear is a dangerous thing. First off, the Prez doesn't have the power to do those things. Secondly, anyone that enabled him would be committing political suicide.

Now as to the "truth squad" thingy, a good idea, not well thought out. This should be something already in place. Not by any given party but by the electorial process that watches EVERYONE in the process. Hmm, sounds like ATS.

He may not have the power to do those things alone, but with a Democrat majority House and Senate, things like the fairness doctrine will be pushed through easily. The second amendment may be a bit more difficult, but I think there are plenty of Democrats in congress that would approve of his proposals.

I think my fear is completely justified.

reply to post by intrepid


I'm not too sure of that. The way these presidents are using executive orders is really a cause for concern. I understand the need for truth but with courtrooms already backed up I don't see the need to get prosecutors in on this. I also believe Sheriffs have more pressing issues to take care of as well. Just another example how famous people get better taken care of than average citizens. If this was a mayoral campaign and lying on ads nobody would blink an eye.

reply to post by nyk537

Originally posted by nyk537
He may not have the power to do those things alone, but with a Democrat majority House and Senate, things like the fairness doctrine will be pushed through easily. The second amendment may be a bit more difficult, but I think there are plenty of Democrats in congress that would approve of his proposals.

I think my fear is completely justified.

Couple that with the ability to nominate SCOTUS appointments that agree with him, and it becomes really scary!

And here some part of me hoped that if McCain screwed up and Obama was elected to POTUS that Obama might actually prove those of us on the right incorrect by being a halfway decent guy and even just a little somewhat decent of a POTUS.

Forget that notion. I give up. If McCain loses, the whole country loses it seems. Those on the left just won't know it until it's way too late.

Ironically, it'll be Hilary sitting back, pointing the finger at America saying "I told you so, I TOLD you so!!!"